Trump’s Fuel-Economy Rollback Could Cut the 2031 Target by Nearly a Third

The Trump administration’s earlier proposal would lower the projected 2031 average fuel-economy target for new cars and light trucks from 50.4 to roughly 34.5 miles per gallon—a reduction of 15.9 mpg, or about 32%. President Donald Trump said he had approved new standards, but reports said the final numerical requirements were not yet clear. The 34.5-mpg figure should therefore be read as the proposal’s target, not a confirmed final figure. 712

What the proposed change means

The figures describe a fleetwide average for automakers’ light-duty vehicle fleets. They do not mean that every car or truck would have to get exactly 34.5 mpg on the road. If the final rule matches the earlier proposal, the required average would be substantially lower than under the Biden-era standard. 57

The administration’s case—and the wider EV policy shift

Trump has described the Biden-era requirements as an effective electric-vehicle mandate. He says easing the rules will reduce vehicle costs and give manufacturers more room to build vehicles buyers want. Those are the administration’s stated reasons; they are not a guarantee that every model’s sticker price will fall. 913

The rollback is part of a broader effort to reverse policies that encouraged automakers to make and sell more electric vehicles. In February, the administration also said it would rescind a rule affecting how electric vehicles’ fuel-economy values count toward automakers’ compliance calculations. 410

The price trade-off: lower upfront costs, more fuel use

The Transportation Department’s estimates say the weaker standards would reduce the cost of new vehicles but increase fuel consumption and carbon-dioxide emissions for decades. For buyers, that creates a trade-off: a possible reduction in the purchase price, set against the prospect of spending more on gasoline over time. The size of that effect will vary with the vehicle and how much it is driven. 2

Why environmental groups object

Environmental groups oppose the rollback because fuel-economy rules can encourage automakers to improve efficiency and reduce gasoline use. A weaker target could dilute that pressure; the Transportation Department’s own estimates project increased fuel consumption and emissions under the proposal. The Sierra Club has also criticized the change, arguing it could make transportation more expensive for Americans. 2310

The central question is not just whether a new vehicle might cost less at the dealership. It is whether any upfront savings outweigh the added fuel costs and pollution over time—and the final rule’s precise terms matter to that calculation. 212